If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Ceilings can of course change. Guys can make changes in their swings that can change their skillsets. They can improve their diet/nutrition/work ethic to improve their body type, position and even speed.

Here is the main thing with Sappelt, as he has always been a fast guy with excellent range in CF who makes a lot of contact.... is the power improvement this year for real, or a by product of the stadiums he has been playing in? At home, his power is in line with where it has been for his career. On the road, its real good (.216 IsoP). If the power increase is legit, then he is showing an improved tool, one that no one really thought was as good as it is. That really is the only thing that has changed in his game. He isn't striking out less and while his walks are up a little bit, its not even a full percent better than it was in Dayton last season.

IMHO, this nails it on Sappelt. If the power is legit and carries through and his K rate stays at about 1 in every 8 PA and only about 1.5 x his Walks, then Drew Stubbs--whom I really like--is going to be really tested to keep the CF spot in Cinti.

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

Suffice it to say that the difference is pretty small. Everybody is expected to hit these days. If you're south of .750, you better be an excellent fielder if you want job security. Even CFs need to take a few walks and have a bit of pop.

Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

Suffice it to say that the difference is pretty small. Everybody is expected to hit these days. If you're south of .750, you better be an excellent fielder if you want job security. Even CFs need to take a few walks and have a bit of pop.

Suffice it to say that the difference is pretty small. Everybody is expected to hit these days. If you're south of .750, you better be an excellent fielder if you want job security. Even CFs need to take a few walks and have a bit of pop.

Interesting stats. Looks like none of our current trio even meets the averages.

Sure, it varies from season to season, particularly if a big bat switches to a corner, but it's quite robust in general.

Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

Suffice it to say that the difference is pretty small. Everybody is expected to hit these days. If you're south of .750, you better be an excellent fielder if you want job security. Even CFs need to take a few walks and have a bit of pop.

That's not a fair argument. For whatever reason, you're using only qualified outfielders. My argument is that Sappelt, even with only 5 HRs per 650 PAs, would be an above-average starter in the major leagues when you factor in his defense provided the rest of his numbers stay the same. Even if you're speaking solely of offense, a .768 OPS is better than more than half the starting center fielders in MLB.

Did you know:
Of the ten center fielders with an OPS of .750 or better, only three of them play above-average defense.

Check out how huge the discrepancy is between center fielders and corner outfielders:

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

What was Ryan Hanigan's ceiling when he went undrafted? Must have been about High-A.

No doubt a "ceiling" is a very real thing, but us pretending to know it for a given player is not realistic. There are too many factors that go into baseball that can't be measured on a tools' sheet.

I would disagree with that I think a majority of the time projections about ceilings can be pretty dead on. Yes things can change (both ways, see C. Heisey) but I feel pretty confident in my assessments on certain guys and Sappelt is one of them. I will miss on some guys but for every guy I miss I find my initial gut thoughts are spot on quite a bit more. Sappelt will make the bigs, no doubt about it in my mind but to me he is alot like Wily Taveras only not as big, fast (maybe close here) or polished. And that is saying something because Wily could use some polish himself.

I should add that doesn't mean Sappelt can't fix those issues and improve his stock but I think it's safe to say he isn't gonna be Ryan Howard and to be frank he isn't gonna be changing his ultimate ceiling much regardless, just his current one.

Last edited by Mario-Rijo; 08-03-2010 at 07:43 AM.

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

You're not kidding. Gomes was a positive contributor early in the season, but now that he has come back to his career norms, his horrible defense is making him a player with almost negative value.

And bringing it back to the 'ceiling' talk, even though the Reds' outfield's offensive numbers have been bad, we can at least take comfort in knowing that they're capable of much more. Stubbs and Bruce have been slumping big-time lately, but when they start to regress to their respective means, watch out--they could be putting up some huge numbers soon.

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo

Really, what is the take on Yonder from your perch?

Maybe I should say I tend to ignore judgments about ceilings when they're meant to limit players, to say they can only be this good and no better. I've watched too many players exceed expectations. I've no objection whatever to judgments about players' ceilings when they are high.

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

My moment of hesitation in talking about guys like Stubbs and Bruce possibly putting up big numbers "soon" based on their perceived ceilings and where their numbers should be expected to fall is you're still looking at awfully young players, whether we're talking literal age, big league experience, or both. So to me, the soon is pretty relative. It could mean within a couple of weeks, it could mean May of 2011. Or one or both could fall well short of their respective ceilings and the entire prediction proves to be completely off base. I'm not saying give up on either one of them. I'm simply saying I'm a Reds fan, and by nature even in a good year I'm skeptical.

It's funny,but I remember a guy named Shawn Abner. I always found some humor in that just because at the time I realized there was a Padres or Mets (whichever, I think he spent time in both organizations) prospect named Shawn Abner I was going to school with a kid named Shawn Abner. I don't know a lot about the player's skill set or numbers in the minors, as I never bothered to look since he had such a dismal career. I want to say he was the number 1 overall pick when he was drafted though, so obviously someone thought his ceiling was plenty high. Then you look at guys like Mike Piazza, who probably wouldn't have even been drafted if Tommy Lasorda wasn't the manager of the Dodgers... or even Hanigan as has been mentioned and their ceilings weren't seen as being too high by anyone. Even if someone thought perhaps one day Hanigan, or even Piazza may possibly be a decent backup catcher in the majors, your typical backup catcher on most teams is a Henry Blanco or even Paul Bako or Corky Miller type... a guy who offers little offensively except for perhaps an occasional home run(if even that) but is a good catch and throw guy and handler of pitchers. Obviously neither description fits the career of Piazza, who was a Hall of Fame caliber hitter and very mediocre defender, or Hanigan, who's a plus defender and handler of pitchers, but a solid batting average/OBP hitter with little power. Now I'm not saying that a backup catcher should always be or even ideally be just a good defender but a weak bat. That's just usually the way most teams seem to do it, or have done it in the past.

Re: Thoughts on David Sappelt

You're admitting that his ceiling can change if he improves. So the initial projection was never a true ceiling, then.

There's also a lot of room between Wily Tavares and Ryan Howard.

There is a difference in a true ceiling and a players current one. Since I watched him at Dayton I thought "best case scenario a better version of Wily Taveras" or if you prefer "what Wily Taveras should be if he would quit swinging at pitchers pitches". Not sure if he is gonna be quite the base stealer that Wily can be but you get my point, I hope. Now for me that hasn't changed and can't change a whole lot, I suppose if he is Rafeal Furcal in the power department that would merit a "true" change in ceiling. But anything else would be incremental and thus not really a change in ceiling because when I say ceiling it's a neighborhood and not an exact address. He'd be in Taveras neighborhood and possibly better if he does everything right from Dayton all the way up the ladder.

Now sometimes I will use "current ceiling" and really I shouldn't because that never really changes (assuming you get an accurate scouting report on ones true talent level) but I use it due to lack of a better term. When I say that though it means "how good he can be if he doesn't change his current skillset" which some players never do. He struck me as the type who would have trouble changing his skillset, everything he does is undisciplined IMO (which is why I often liken him to Ryan Freel). Which makes his "current skillset" less than a better version of Wily Taveras and maybe even less than Wily Taveras himself. Then again I haven't seen him play since Dayton so maybe he has made some adjustments I don't know about.

I know that people don't like it when I put a label on a guy but why is it ok to only tell the good on a player? Why brush the negative under the carpet so we can all be disappointed every time a prospect comes up. Heck most don't listen to a thing I have to say about a player anyway. Sorry to those who don't like it but there are a few who appreciate it. I wish someone would have been giving a descenting view on Homer Bailey on his way up and I wouldn't have been so damn disappointed.

How many players have been a disappointment and thus thrown under the bus because the fans had been spoon fed bologna on them. Would it have made a difference if people knew ahead of time that Paul O'Neill wasn't gonna be a slugger but still a very good player? Popular opinion can drive a good player out of town and keep bad ones around and IMO RZ has a responsibility to see both sides of the coin.

Last edited by Mario-Rijo; 08-03-2010 at 02:59 PM.

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball